What Is NeuroFinance?

One of the first ques­tions I am asked when­ever I present my research usu­ally is “what is neu­ro­fi­nance?”. Below is my view on this emerg­ing field of research, defin­ing it, espe­cially with regards to behav­ioral finance and neu­roe­co­nom­ics.

The Neu­ro­fi­nance Par­a­digm

In neu­ro­fi­nance, we exam­ine exper­i­men­tally the nature of the cog­ni­tive processes engaged in acquir­ing and pro­cess­ing infor­ma­tion in finan­cial deci­sion mak­ing. We fur­ther study how peo­ple select action plans based on the acquired rep­re­sen­ta­tions of the val­ues of poten­tial invest­ment prospects.  One of our goals is to iden­tify what kind of infor­ma­tion the human brain can process effi­ciently (and what kind it can­not), as well as the envi­ron­men­tal con­di­tions facil­i­tat­ing or ham­per­ing this infor­ma­tion pro­cess­ing. Another goal is to bet­ter under­stand how invest­ment deci­sions are tuned depend­ing on the appre­ci­a­tion of dis­tinct kinds of uncer­tainty, such as risk, jump risk, and esti­ma­tion uncer­tainty (ambi­gu­ity and model uncer­tainty).

A new Kind of Behav­ioral Finance

Behav­ioral finance emerged in the 90s to per­fect the insights of math­e­mat­i­cal finance. The point of depar­ture of behav­ioral finance is that because clas­si­cal finance assumes full ratio­nal­ity, it can­not explain many price pat­terns. Using insights from all behav­ioral sci­ences (cog­ni­tive neu­ro­science, psy­chol­ogy, soci­ol­ogy) on how real peo­ple depart from the ratio­nal model — real peo­ple are bound­edly ratio­nal, behav­ioral finance can ratio­nal­ize hitherto-puzzling price pat­terns.

The epis­te­mol­ogy under­ly­ing neu­ro­fi­nance is dif­fer­ent and reflects recent advances in deci­sion neu­ro­science. We’re ini­tially agnos­tic about the degree of ratio­nal­ity of peo­ple, i.e, we do not take peo­ple to be lim­ited in their com­pu­ta­tional capa­bil­i­ties. Rather, we infer their degree of sophis­ti­ca­tion exper­i­men­tally, from the obser­va­tion of behav­ior and neural activ­ity dur­ing cog­ni­tive tasks per­formed in the lab. These cog­ni­tive tasks repli­cate chal­lenges that are rou­tinely encoun­tered in real world finan­cial deci­sion mak­ing. E.g., learn­ing asset dis­tri­b­u­tions that jump across time, or guess­ing what other peo­ple think—The­ory of Mind.

One impor­tant aspect of this new par­a­digm is to exam­ine in the lab which envi­ron­men­tal con­di­tions ham­per the emer­gence of ratio­nal­ity, and which con­di­tions help make peo­ple smart. Thus, Neu­ro­fi­nance affords a unique oppor­tu­nity to

  • develop acute pre­dic­tion of investors’ behav­ior
  • iden­tify envi­ron­men­tal mark­ers of behav­ioral sophistication/irrationality in finan­cial mar­kets
  • cre­ate nudges to aid deci­sion mak­ing

Why look­ing at Neural Activ­ity?

Methodology-wise, neu­ro­fi­nance lies at the inter­sec­tion of exper­i­men­tal eco­nom­ics and com­pu­ta­tional neu­ro­science. We repli­cate in the lab core chal­lenges faced by finance prac­ti­tion­ers, and we exam­ine how lab sub­jects (reg­u­lar peo­ple as well as finance pro­fes­sion­als) solve these chal­lenges.

The ques­tion is: Do the cog­ni­tive processes that the sub­jects imple­ment approx­i­mate the opti­mal solu­tion, which “Mr Spock” (the ratio­nal agent) would imple­ment? Or are these cog­ni­tive processes more akin to the bound­edly ratio­nal heuris­tics which “Homer Simp­son” would use1?

To answer this ques­tion, we do two things:

  • Look at behav­ior: Some­times, from observ­ing the choices of a sub­ject through­out the exper­i­ment, we can infer to what extent the sub­ject acted more like Mr Spock, or more like Homer. This kind of infer­ence works well when Mr Spock and Homer would behave dif­fer­ently in the task, which is often the case.
  • Scan the brain of the sub­jects dur­ing the exper­i­ment: If we iden­tify brain regions with a response pro­file con­sis­tent with the spe­cific com­pu­ta­tional process per­formed by Mr Spock (resp Homer), the behav­ioral evi­dence that sub­jects acted more like Mr Spock (resp Homer) is strength­ened.

One exam­ple: To learn opti­mally the expected returns of assets that jump over time, investors must acquire Bayesian jump detec­tion sig­nals, which they use at each point in time to tune their learn­ing rate. The plau­si­ble alter­na­tive to this Bayesian learn­ing, rein­force­ment learn­ing, does noth­ing of the kind. So, iden­ti­fy­ing brain regions whose activ­ity cor­re­lates with the Bayesian sig­nals enables the infer­ence that sub­jects approx­i­mated Bayesian learn­ing. The infer­ence is pow­er­ful because it is very unlikely that the iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of these neural sig­nals be the result of serendip­ity.

Com­pu­ta­tional neu­roe­co­nom­ics Applied to Finance

This com­pu­ta­tional approach reflects a new trend in neu­roe­co­nom­ics. By iden­ti­fy­ing regions that imple­ment a spe­cific com­pu­ta­tional process, instead of merely report­ing the “acti­va­tion” of a brain region in a given exper­i­men­tal con­di­tion (which involves many com­pu­ta­tional processes), this approach enables a more con­vinc­ing form of infer­ence than is tra­di­tion­ally made in func­tional imag­ing stud­ies.

What for? Impli­ca­tions for the indus­try

Port­fo­lio man­agers and traders have to process infor­ma­tion on the spot in rapidly chang­ing envi­ron­ments. Lit­tle is known about how to tai­lor orga­ni­za­tional and indi­vid­ual decision-making processes to help peo­ple process infor­ma­tion effi­ciently in such con­texts. By iden­ti­fy­ing envi­ron­men­tal fac­tors improv­ing effi­cient infor­ma­tion pro­cess­ing, it is hoped that research in neu­ro­fi­nance will pro­duce prac­ti­cal results on how to improve invest­ment and trad­ing deci­sions, at both indi­vid­ual and orga­ni­za­tional lev­els.

  1. You will have rec­og­nized the fig­ures employed by Richard Thaler to illus­trate these dif­fer­ent meth­ods in his book Nudge []

Positions

Assis­tant Pro­fes­sor of Finance — Australian School of Busi­ness, Syd­ney
Vis­it­ing Asso­ciate in Eco­nom­ics — California Insti­tute of Tech­nol­ogy, Pasadena, CA

Student Opportunities

Are you a UNSW stu­dent look­ing for oppor­tu­ni­ties to explore neu­ro­fi­nance? See what’s avail­able and pos­si­ble here

Contacts

Elise Payzan-Le Nestour
Room 338 - Level 3
Australian School of Business, UNSW Sydney
+61 (2) 9385 4273 | +1 626 407 3330
elise@elisepayzan.com